Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  TUNCER v. TURKEY

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 35 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 22.01.2013 - 31446/09
• EGMR, 25.11.2014 - 31446/09
• EGMR - 31446/09 (anhängig)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 01.02.2000 - 32307/96

  SCHIMANEK v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.2014 - 31446/09

  Accordingly, the Court sees no reason to depart from its considerations in the aforementioned decisions (see also Schimanek v. Austria, (dec.) no. 32307/96, 1 February 2000, Salaman v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 43505/98, 15 June 2000 and Roberts and Roberts v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 38681/08, 5 July 2011).
• EGMR, 15.06.2000 - 43505/98

  SALAMAN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.2014 - 31446/09

  Accordingly, the Court sees no reason to depart from its considerations in the aforementioned decisions (see also Schimanek v. Austria, (dec.) no. 32307/96, 1 February 2000, Salaman v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 43505/98, 15 June 2000 and Roberts and Roberts v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 38681/08, 5 July 2011).
• EGMR, 31.01.2006 - 58709/00

  YAZAR v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.2014 - 31446/09

  It must be further noted that the Court has already examined similar grievances in the past and has found that the absence of a request for the disqualification of the judge on grounds of impartiality pursuant to Article 23 of the Code of Criminal Procedure constituted a failure on the part of the applicants to exhaust domestic remedies (see Yazar v. Turkey (partial decision), no. 58709/00, 31 January 2006, in respect of Nazmi Kar, Zekeriya Özen, Fuat Basarılı and Osman Yavuz).

 
• EGMR, 05.07.2011 - 38681/08

  ROBERTS AND ROBERTS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.2014 - 31446/09

  Accordingly, the Court sees no reason to depart from its considerations in the aforementioned decisions (see also Schimanek v. Austria, (dec.) no. 32307/96, 1 February 2000, Salaman v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 43505/98, 15 June 2000 and Roberts and Roberts v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 38681/08, 5 July 2011).
• EGMR, 20.03.2012 - 24240/07

  ÜMMÜHAN KAPLAN c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.2014 - 31446/09

  The Court observes that, as pointed out by the Government, a new domestic remedy has been established in Turkey following the application of the pilot judgment procedure in the case of Ümmühan Kaplan v. Turkey (no. 24240/07, 20 March 2012).
• EGMR, 26.03.2013 - 4860/09

  TURGUT ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.2014 - 31446/09

  A description of the relevant domestic law regarding length of proceedings may be found in Turgut and Others v. Turkey ((dec.), no. 4860/09, §§ 19-26, 26 March 2013).
• EGMR, 20.02.2014 - 16794/05

  NOVRUZ ISMAYILOV v. AZERBAIJAN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.2014 - 31446/09

  In order to comply with the rule, normal recourse should be had by an applicant to remedies which are available and sufficient to afford redress in respect of the breaches alleged (see, among other authorities, Novruz Ismayilov v. Azerbaijan, no. 16794/05, § 69, 20 February 2014).
• EGMR, 03.06.2014 - 72174/10

  YIGITDOGAN v. TURKEY (No. 2)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.2014 - 31446/09

  However, taking account of the Government's preliminary objection with regard to the applicant's failure to make use of the new domestic remedy established by Law no. 6384, the Court reiterates its conclusion in the case of Turgut and Others (see YiÄ?itdoÄ?an v. Turkey, no. 72174/10, § 59, 3 June 2014).